damn... those sidepods are actually kind of skinny... short and tight... they must have a done a lot of optimizing under the skin to pack all that stuff in there... makes one (me at least) worry about reliability...

_________________How to fix F1:1. Stop seeking consensuses on rules - it will always turn out to be the least favourible option for everyone involved...2. Listen to the fans - there are plenty of them and they have good ideas...

"They have followed Ferrari's 2012 lead in using pull-rod front suspension, which has a lower centre of gravity and the pull-rod manages the airflow off the front wing better than the more common push-rod.

Wasn't Gary saying the exact opposite last year when Ferrari unveiled theirs? Saying the pull the rod would cause problems with Aero?

Edit.

No he didn't.

Did say this though

Quote:

Outside Ferrari, I'm not sure you'd find anyone in F1 who can see the advantage of it.

Incubus you need to do some technical reading. The designers aren't morons. The step is there because they want to exploit the flow of air under the nose. If you lift the nose and chassis as high as the rules permit (which are two different heights, hence the step) you get as much air flow underneath as possible, and then you have the ability to manipulate that air into the sidepods, around them, and over them, to create more downforce and rear grip. You put big undercuts under the sidepods to match, and you have much greater control of where that air goes, which means you can use it over the different parts of the rear end to accomplish different goals, one of which is using downwash to help manipulate the flow of exhaust gasses.

Don't need to read anymore as I already know all of this. The issue is that the upper has NOTHING to do with the lower and the noses can be designed so they are more aesthetically pleasing whilst not losing any of the potency of the raised front end. Additionally, the noses can be designed to sit lower and STILL harness all of that air for downforce.

I realize that F1 is a business of function over form but to what point? Additionally the step in the nose is contradictory to all things efficient when it comes to aero so some of the benefit of the raised nose is nullified by the air dam the step creates on top. With aero you want smooth flowing elements in order to minimize turbulence as turbulence leads to instability, which when it makes its way further down the line disrupts flow in many other areas. Either way I hope the 2014 changes means a return to beautiful cars that go fast because quite frankly no would enjoy watching this, even if it goes 500MPH flat out on every track:

At least I know I won't.

But the upper has EVERYTHING to do with the lower...

The regulations stipulate that the front wing has to have a certain cross section. Which means that as a by-product of getting the lower of it as high as possible, the upper section is forced to fit into certain regulations.

As for why teams would choose to do it and have an ugly donkey front section, it's because the benefits from underneath vastly outweigh the tiny aero issues of a big step on top.

And again, teams will no doubt choose not to apply a vanity panel for racing, because the extra weight will be hamper more than the tiny aero issue of the step.

Mclaren tried to run an aesthetically pleasing front end - but realised you do lose some of the potency by not having the raised front end.

Can you explain HOW you think that having a lower front end with lower volume of space under it can create as much downforce as having as big a space as possible contributing to airflow to the rear of the car?

Incubus you need to do some technical reading. The designers aren't morons. The step is there because they want to exploit the flow of air under the nose. If you lift the nose and chassis as high as the rules permit (which are two different heights, hence the step) you get as much air flow underneath as possible, and then you have the ability to manipulate that air into the sidepods, around them, and over them, to create more downforce and rear grip. You put big undercuts under the sidepods to match, and you have much greater control of where that air goes, which means you can use it over the different parts of the rear end to accomplish different goals, one of which is using downwash to help manipulate the flow of exhaust gasses.

Don't need to read anymore as I already know all of this. The issue is that the upper has NOTHING to do with the lower and the noses can be designed so they are more aesthetically pleasing whilst not losing any of the potency of the raised front end. Additionally, the noses can be designed to sit lower and STILL harness all of that air for downforce.

I realize that F1 is a business of function over form but to what point? Additionally the step in the nose is contradictory to all things efficient when it comes to aero so some of the benefit of the raised nose is nullified by the air dam the step creates on top. With aero you want smooth flowing elements in order to minimize turbulence as turbulence leads to instability, which when it makes its way further down the line disrupts flow in many other areas. Either way I hope the 2014 changes means a return to beautiful cars that go fast because quite frankly no would enjoy watching this, even if it goes 500MPH flat out on every track:

At least I know I won't.

But the upper has EVERYTHING to do with the lower...

The regulations stipulate that the front wing has to have a certain cross section. Which means that as a by-product of getting the lower of it as high as possible, the upper section is forced to fit into certain regulations.

As for why teams would choose to do it and have an ugly donkey front section, it's because the benefits from underneath vastly outweigh the tiny aero issues of a big step on top.

And again, teams will no doubt choose not to apply a vanity panel for racing, because the extra weight will be hamper more than the tiny aero issue of the step.

Mclaren tried to run an aesthetically pleasing front end - but realised you do lose some of the potency by not having the raised front end.

Can you explain HOW you think that having a lower front end with lower volume of space under it can create as much downforce as having as big a space as possible contributing to airflow to the rear of the car?

I disagree with this statement, last year mclaren did not "try to run an aesthetically pleasing front end", they kept to the same design philosophy which they had used for a number of years, they did however over the course of last season find that they have pursued all avenues of development for that particular design philosophy hence they need to do something different this year so they can unlock new avenues for further development.

_________________'There are know followers, there are unknown followers and there are unknown unknown followers' Donald Rumsfeld 2012

Pretty sure the switch to pullrod is aimed almost directly at eliminating JB's tire woes, but we'll have to wait and see if it works. Its hard for the teams to work on solving last year's tire problems when the tires themselves have also changed for this year.

No, I think the switch to pull-rod is because following the switch to a higher nose, that raises the centre of gravity. Pull-rod suspension allows you to have a lower centre of gravity than push-rod - so you get back a little of what you have lost in terms of mechanical grip.

Obviously, there are other issues factors involved that need working around, but I reckon Mclaren can sort them out...

Never been a real fan of this livery, its mainly chrome. I was at least hoping something a little different but it's pretty much identical to the livery they've had for the last 7 years.

I really liked this livery for a few years but it is getting a bit boring now I agree. I also had hoped for something new this year, but maybe their hands are tied somewhat by the sponsors.

Agreed. I wonder if Ferrari are going to be boring again and paint their cars red!

i recall times when ferrari chose a dark-metallic red instead of the strawberry-color they have nowadays ... they could also do a tribute-color and go for dark-grey, as TVs early on didn't show any colors

Well the darker metallic reds were a stray from their traditional Ferrari Red which is an actual official color anyone can buy to paint their car like my brother did in '92. For a while they tried something different and then decided to go back to their official color. this Chrome paint is something special for me. It's so hard to imagine that paint can turn out so amazingly similar to actual chrome.

What I can't understand is how so many people complain about liveries being messy due to cluttering the cars all up with sponsors all over the place and yet, here we have the cleanest of all the liveries which shows all the beautiful flowing lines and now it's boring. I'm sorry but I'm a car guy through and through and for me, seeing all the flowing lines of a car like this is fantastic. I will say their West liveries were some of my favorites in history. McLaren just have excellent design prowess.

Pretty sure the switch to pullrod is aimed almost directly at eliminating JB's tire woes, but we'll have to wait and see if it works. Its hard for the teams to work on solving last year's tire problems when the tires themselves have also changed for this year.

No, I think the switch to pull-rod is because following the switch to a higher nose, that raises the centre of gravity. Pull-rod suspension allows you to have a lower centre of gravity than push-rod - so you get back a little of what you have lost in terms of mechanical grip.

Obviously, there are other issues factors involved that need working around, but I reckon Mclaren can sort them out...

All but Ferrari managed okay with the high noses and push rod last year, so for some teams the CoG issue isn't important enough to force the switch. The Ferrari was overall pretty kind to its tires last year, and at the very least pretty consistent with them. Could see McLaren looking at pullrod to try to achieve the same thing, although the decision would have likely been made mid-season-ish.

Pretty sure the switch to pullrod is aimed almost directly at eliminating JB's tire woes, but we'll have to wait and see if it works. Its hard for the teams to work on solving last year's tire problems when the tires themselves have also changed for this year.

No, I think the switch to pull-rod is because following the switch to a higher nose, that raises the centre of gravity. Pull-rod suspension allows you to have a lower centre of gravity than push-rod - so you get back a little of what you have lost in terms of mechanical grip.

Obviously, there are other issues factors involved that need working around, but I reckon Mclaren can sort them out...

All but Ferrari managed okay with the high noses and push rod last year, so for some teams the CoG issue isn't important enough to force the switch. The Ferrari was overall pretty kind to its tires last year, and at the very least pretty consistent with them. Could see McLaren looking at pullrod to try to achieve the same thing, although the decision would have likely been made mid-season-ish.

Yea, but I think Mclaren are always a team keen on having a high amount of mechanical grip... Something with the low CoG helps. Therefore moving the nose up, they need to lower the CoG to retain that characteristic...

All of them look mostly the same as last year because the rules dictate that...unless you look at the details, where none of them are very similar to last year. And its the details that make the difference.

The McLaren is the biggest deviation from its last car...the least "evolved" of the launched cars so far. Saying it looks the same is kinda funny actually.

I don';t know about that, Ferrari's F138 is an evolution of last years car but so many systems have been completely changed or modified so heavily the car is essentially almost a completely new car as well. Tough call between them thus far.

The Ferrari looks most like last year's car by far, especially the Brazil 2012 spec. If you took the modesty panel off you'd think they only brought small updates.

Generally it is evolution and not revolution that gets you results in times of stable regs. Look at Ferrari from 99-04, Williams from 92-94, McLaren in 98-00, Red Bull 09-12, McLaren 88-91. Everyone had to get radical in 09 so Brawn don't count and their evolution of that 09 car was rubbish because they were out developed. But they did consistently make rubbish evolutions from 10-12. So evolution is pretty consistent, revolution changes everything either for the better or the worse. That's why everyone will evolve and not revolve this year perhaps with the exception of Mercedes because they have to do something radical to get back to the front but they also risk getting it horribly horribly wrong.

The Ferrari does seem to be a continuing of last years, but the MP4-28...well, I don't know, pull-rod, stepped nose (changed chassis), severely modified side-pods, and rear suspension, that looks kind of radical to me.

I just hope they got all the bugs out in time and won't have the same issues Ferrari had last at the start of last year...because honestly, Macca's officials statements with 'we decided to change the car to have better development opportunities, and not reach the development ceiling" kind of sounds similar to what Ferrari were mumbling last year. If I remember correctly, they were saying something like "the car is fundamentally good, it allows good development, but we need to understand it"...or something like that. And they were running aero paint tests in FP1 in Australia. Sure, they were right in the end, the car DID live up, more or less, to expectations, but I pray to God Mclaren gets their act on the road sooner...

Actually 3 manufacturers (McLaren, Ferrari and Force India ) have made significant changes to their monocoque. The only one which is close to last year is Lotus.Ferrari and FI might look same, but only thing that have retained similarity are sidepods for Ferrari. Rear end of Ferrari is complete deviation from last year. Stretched, compacted, cleaner with steps taken to reduce the messy airflow at the back, and redesign of rear suspension. Add to that completely new KERS package which is now single package box under fuel tank which has all KERS related parts packed in as 1 package. Cooling ducts from front are gone, front chassis design is tweaked. F138 is even more of a air gobbler at front than last year which hopefully gives them lot of scope to develop it over the season.

Force India again has undergone fundamental change in Aerodynamic characteristics of the car. And they have completely new monocoque as well with lot of changes.McLaren though having kept rear end similar to last year have completely went in different direction at the front.

All these 3 cars are more than minor evolution of last year. Probably FI is basically the one who have undergone mild evolution, but they have added completely new concepts which some teams used last year, but they didnt.